Education Journal

2013; 2(6): 208-221

Published online October 20, 2013 (http://www.sciencepublishinggroup.com/j/edu)
doi: 10.11648/j.edu.20130206.12

The effectiveness of a blended learning program on

developing Palestinian tenth graders' English writing
skills
Awad Soliman Keshta1, Ismail Ibrahim Harb2
1
College of Education, the Islamic University of Gaza (IUG), Palestine
2
Ministry of Education, Gaza, Palestine

Email address:
Dr.awadk@yahoo.com(A. S. Keshta), ismail_harb2005@yahoo.com(I. I. Harb)

To cite this article:

Awad Soliman Keshta, Ismail Ibrahim Harb. The Effectiveness of a Blended Learning Program on Developing Palestinian Tenth
Graders' English Writing Skills. Education Journal. Vol. 2, No. 6, 2013, pp. 208-221. doi: 10.11648/j.edu.20130206.12

Abstract: This study aimed at investigating the effectiveness of using a blended learning program on developing
Palestinian tenth graders’ English writing skills. To achieve the study aims, the researchers designed a writing achievement
test consisting of (40) items. The sample study consisted of (40) students from Shohadaa' Rafah Basic School in Rafah
Directorate of Education 2012-2013. The blended learning program was used in teaching the experimental group (20)
students, while the traditional method was used with the control one (20) students in the second term of the school year
(2012-2013). The experiment lasted for eight weeks. The study findings revealed that there were significant differences at (α
≤0.05) in the mean scores of the test in favor of the experimental group. The findings also pointed out that there were
statistically significant differences at (α ≤0.05) in the participants' achievement level before and after implementing the
blended program in favor of the post-application. This was attributed to the blended learning program in teaching writing. In
the light of the study results, the researcher recommended that education stakeholders should adopt the blend in teaching
English, hold educational courses and workshops for teachers in employing blended learning to enrich the teaching learning
process, create effective learning environment that enhances self- learning and develops students' achievement level.

Keywords: Blended Learning, Effectiveness, Writing Skills

Blended learning is natural evolution of e-learning

1. Introduction
Writing is necessary in everyday life, in business, in
creativity, and in scholarly pursuits. Additionally, Carroll
(1990: 1) asserts that writing is the most important invention
in human history because it provides relatively permanent
record of information, opinions, beliefs, feelings, arguments,
explanation and theories. It allows us to share our
communication not only with our contemporaries, but also
with future generations. It permits people from the near and
far distant past to speak to us. It is vital for teachers to
employ effective methods of teaching that enhance students'
ability to communicate ideas and feelings via writing.
Online learning provides major benefits to both students and
teachers. The benefits include convenience, time and
geographic flexibility (Bates, 2000). Delacey, and Leonard
(2002), Rossett, Douglis, and Frazee (2003) have proved the
existence of several problems facing e-learning: e-learning
programs cost a lot; students who learned electronically are
less efficient in expressing their ideas.
towards a complete program of various multimedia applied
in an ideal way to solve problems, taking into account the
individual differences and achieving a distinguished
teaching. It is considered one of the modern trends based
upon employing information technology in designing new
learning situations which increase active learning and
learner-centered strategies. Blended learning combines the
advantages of face-to-face and e-learning to satisfy
individual differences (Bersin and Associate, 2003). Bonk
and Graham (2006: 3-5) points out that blended learning is
not just about using technology because it is available;
blended learning is about finding better ways of supporting
students in achieving the learning objectives and providing
them with the best possible learning and teaching
experiences, as well as supporting teachers in their role
(including the management and administration of courses).
The above mentioned viewpoints and discussions support
developing teaching approach to develop writing skills and
highlight the importance of blending various multi-media
 Education Journal 2013; 2(6): 208-221
with face-to-face.
1.1. Statement of the Problem
The researchers have observed students’ low achievement
in writing skills in achievement tests. Although our students
have good access to modern technologies, they do not make
use of them in their learning in general and English learning
in particular. Hence, the researchers believe in the
importance of using blended learning program in developing
students' writing, where the use of various multi-media
could help students employ writing skills into daily writing
tasks such as emails to a friend, posting or sharing ideas
through texts or short paragraphs which may assist students
become more effective communicators through writing
1.2. Research Questions
In the light of the study problem, the following questions
emerged:
1. Are there differences in the achievement level in
writing skills in the post test between the students of the
experimental group (blended learning) and their
counterparts of the control group?
2. Are there differences in the achievement level in
writing skills between the students of the experimental
group (blended learning) in the pre-post test?
1.3. Purpose of the Study
The current study aimed at investigating the effectiveness
of the blended learning program on developing and retention
of Palestinian tenth graders' English writing skills.
2. Literature Review
2.1. Writing
According to Chastain (1988: 244) "Writing is a basic
communication skill and a unique asset in the process of
learning a second language" while Sokolik, (2003) describes
writing as the mental work, which involves inventing ideas,
thinking about how to express them, and organizing them
into sentences and paragraphs that will be clear to readers. In
describing writing, Olshtain, (2001), and Reid, (2002) point
out that it is the process of documenting thoughts and
experiences. It is viewed as a communicative social activity
through which one can communicate a variety of messages
to a close or distant, known or unknown reader(s).
2.1.1. The Nature of Writing
Writing is not merely putting down word after word to
form a sentence or writing one sentence beside the other to
form a paragraph. The difficulty lies in generating and
organizing ideas as well as in translating these ideas in
writing in English Language (EFL Writing) into coherent,
accurate, informative and readable text (Richards and
Renandya, 2005). Writing is not always spoken words put
onto paper. Richards (2003) explains the difference between
written language and spoken discourse saying that written
209
language employs different syntax and vocabulary. It uses
complex rather than simple clauses, a greater variety of
clause types, more specific vocabulary, more complex verb
phrases and tenses and more devices. According to Dixon,
(1986), Haring, (1994) and Johnstone et al., (2002) writing
is not limited to using orthographic symbols, according to a
certain purpose. It also requires selecting and organizing
experience according to a particular purpose.
3.1.2. Teaching Writing
Harmer (2001: 79-84) explains four reasons for teaching
writing to students of English as a foreign language. They
are reinforcement, language development, learning style and
writing as a skill:1- Reinforcement: some students acquire
languages in an oral /aural way; others get benefit from
seeing the language written down. The visual demonstration
of language construction is invaluable for both
understanding and memory". It is useful for students to write
the new language shortly after studying it. 2- Language
development: the process of writing is different from the
process of speaking; the former helps us to learn as we go
along. "The mental activity of constructing proper written
texts is part of the ongoing learning experiences". 3-
Learning style: some students are quick at acquiring
language just by looking and listening. Others may take
longer time to spend in producing language in a slower way,
thus making writing appropriate for those learners. 4-
Writing as a skill: the most essential reason for teaching
writing is that it is a basic language skill like speaking,
listening and reading. Students need to know how to write
letters, compositions, essays, reports, and how to use
writing's conventions.
2.1.3. The Principles of Teaching Writing
Tang (2006) applies some principles for developing
writing skills in teaching writing and how they can be
applied in a Chinese ESL classroom: 1-Raise students`
awareness: Students should be helped to see the role of
writing in language learning. 2- Students have ideas:
Students have not only the exposition of ideas, but also the
working out of ideas". It is teachers` responsibility to help
students analyze their own ideas through teaching. 3- Read
to write: Writing does not exist alone. Before a leaner starts
to write, he/she needs to read so as to learn the language and
get familiar with certain patterns or rhetorical structures. 4-
Teach process writing: Process writing is characterized by
the awareness of the writer of the writing process and the
intervention of a teacher or peers at any time during the
process of writing to improve writing skills instead of fixing
mistakes. This approach aims at enabling students to share
information, make personal choices about reading and
writing, take the responsibility of their own learning task,
take writing as process, and develop cooperation. 5- Create a
learner-centered classroom in active communication:
Basically, writing is a verbal communication. The view that
writing is a verbal communication finds the strongest
support in Bakhtin`s dialogic theory of language. It implies
the interactive nature of writing.
210 Awad Soliman Keshta et al.: The Effectiveness of a Blended Learning Program on
Developing Palestinian Tenth Graders' English Writing Skills
2.1.4. Writing Skills
Palmer (1986) analyzes the skills attached to writing
under five headings:
A) Graphical or visual skills:
1. Writing graphemes (letters of the alphabet).
2. Spelling.
3. Punctuation and capitalization.
4. Format (such as the layout of a letter or a shopping list).
B) Grammatical skills: These refer to the pupils' ability to
use a variety of sentence patterns and constructions
successfully.
C) Expressive or stylistic skills: They include the pupils'
ability to express precise meanings through various styles.
D) Rhetorical skills: They refer to the pupils' ability to use
linguistic cohesive devices. The elements of rhetoric were
treated under five headings: invention, arrangement, diction,
memory, and delivery.
E) Organizational skills: These are skills concerned with
organizing pieces of information into paragraphs and texts.
This involves the sequencing of ideas and the avoidance of
irrelevant information.
2.1.5. Writing as a Process
Min and Li (2007: 42) emphasize that "Process writing is
learning how to write by writing." This current emphasis in
writing instruction focuses on the process of creating writing
rather than the end product. The basic premise of process
writing is that all learners can write and the focus here is on
creating quality content and learning the genres of writing.
Johnstone et al. (2002) assure that writing is an interactive
process involving the following elements:
1. The writer's long-term memory: This includes
knowledge of topic, audience and writing plans developed
through previous experience.
2. The task environment: It involves the specific rhetorical
problem the writer encounters (e.g. topic and audience).
3. The writing processes: These involve planning,
translating, reviewing and monitoring sub-processes.
Interaction between these elements is important for
developing writing skills. For example, writers whose
long-term memory is updated in a rich meaningful task
environment are likely to develop better writing skills.
Lindsay and Knight (2006: 94-95) break down the writing
process into three stages:
1- Preparation: Think about the reader, consider why we
are writing, think about the content, and decide the
appropriate layout and style.
2- Drafting: Put our ideas together in a draft form. This is
probably all we need for things like shopping lists and
memos. Gebhardt and Rodrigues (1989: 45) indicate that
drafting and redrafting can be done several times during
writing process.
3-Editing and Rewriting: Write several times so that the
text is coherent and clear.
The researchers believe that EFL learner need more
practice in order to focus on these stages and thus develop
their writing skill.
2.1.6. Mechanics of Writing
Mechanics of writing is a writing sub-skill. Norman et al.
(2005) define it as "the sub-skill that includes such things as
punctuation, spelling, abbreviations, acronyms …etc ".
Similarly, Sun (2003) simply states that mechanics of
writing specifies the established conventions for words that
one uses in his / her documentation. These conventions
include capitalization, contractions, gerunds, participles,
numbers, numerals, pronouns, technical abbreviations,
acronyms, units of measurement and punctuation marks.
2.1.6.1. Punctuation
Angelillo, (2002) points out that punctuation marks are
one of the components of writing mechanics. These marks
are divided into internal marks – referring to the punctuation
marks within the sentence – and end marks – which are used
at the end of a sentence or a question. Another classification
of punctuation marks by Sun, (2003) divides them into
marks within the word like apostrophes and hyphens, marks
between words and end marks. Incorrect punctuation may
create document noise and confusion. Knowing where to
punctuate and why contributes to accurate editing.
2.1.6.2. Capitalization
King (2003) regards capital letters as a form of
punctuation in that they help guide the eye and mind through
a text. He adds that the common usages of capital letters to
start sentences and surnames are clear enough; however, a
good deal of mystery surrounds the use of capitals in some
other areas of writing.
2.1.6.3. Coherence and Cohesion
Coherence is very essential in enabling the reader to
follow the flow of ideas and the intended meaning of the
writer. Richards, (1990) supports the effectiveness of
coherence as an important quality of effective writing.
Gebhardt & Rodrigues (1989: 81-83) point out the
importance of coherence in making ideas stick together
where each sentence should relate to the proceeding and
following sentences. They mention four tools that enhance
coherence:
1. Repetition of words, ideas, phrases …etc.
2. Synonyms.
3. Pronoun reference.
4. Transitional markers
Many researchers agree that cohesion, on the macro level
is related to linking ideas whereas on the micro level, it is
concerned with connecting sentences and phrases. Cohesion
refers to the explicit linguistic devices that link the sentences
in a text. These cohesive devices include reference,
substitution, ellipsis, conjunction and lexical cohesion
(Halliday & Hasan, 1985), and since they are manifested at
the surface level of a text, cohesion should be relatively
straightforward to identify.
2.2. Blended Learning
The North American Council for Online Learning
(NACOL, 2008: 5-10) defines the blended learning setting
 Education Journal 2013; 2(6): 208-221
as the combination of online delivery of content with the
best features of classroom interaction and live instruction to
personalize learning, allow thoughtful reflection, and
differentiate instruction from student to student across a
diverse group of learners.
2.2.1. Blended Learning Environment
Blended learning is the natural progress of e-learning
towards a complete program of various multi-media and
applying it in an ideal way to solve problems. Blended
learning, as mentioned above, blends both e-learning and
face-to-face learning. Figure (1) depicts the rapid growth of
distributed learning environments and its convergence with
face-to-face learning environments. The intersection of the
two archetypes depicts where blended learning systems are
emerging (Graham, 2004: 6)
Figure 1. Progressive convergence of traditional face-to-face and
distributed environments allowing development of blended learning
systems
Blended learning environment which is regarded as a type
of distance education integrates the advantages of distance
education with the effective aspects of traditional education,
such as face-to-face interaction. In contrast to classical
learning environment which poses restrictions on place and
time, e-learning provides an environment where the learners
can study regardless of time and place restrictions. The
factors such as learners’ individual differences, personal
characteristics and learning styles have significant impacts
on the learning environment. For instance, the learners who
have difficulty in establishing communication in the
classroom environment find it easier to communicate in the
electronic environment. It is obvious that the weaknesses
and strengths of online environment and the weaknesses and
strengths of face-to-face education integrate in blended
learning (Finn & Bucceri, 2004). Assuming such an
environment results in:
1. Students' having more control over their learning
(Hooper, 1992, Saunders and Klemming, 2003);
2. Increasing social competencies.
3. Improving student morale and overall satisfaction .
4. Enhancing information skills acquisition and student
achievement
5. Respecting differences in learning style and pace
211
(Kendall, 2001) and;
6. Fostering communication and closeness among students
and tutors (Joliffe, Ritter, and Stevens, 2001 as cited in
Wood, 2009).
2.2.2. Characteristics of Blended Learning
Huang, Zhou and Wang (2006) assume that blended
learning has three characteristics. The first is flexibility of
providing learning resources. The second is support of
learning diversity. As learners are diverse in terms of
learning styles, learning proficiency, as well as learning
ability, blended learning can come to the rescue by making it
possible for individualized learning and self-regulated
learning to happen. The third is enrichment of e-learning
experience. From the faculty’s perspective, blended learning
can enable them to improve their existing teaching practices.
According to Al Fiky (2011: 23-24), blended learning
redesigns the educational model with these characteristics:
1. Moving form lectures to student centered learning.
2. Maximizing teacher-student, student-student,
student-content, student-outside resources
interaction.
3. Integrated evaluation techniques for teachers and
students.
4. Broaden the spaces and opportunities available for
learning. (Bath and Bourke, 2010: 1);
5. Support course management activities (e.g.,
communication, assessment submission, marking
and feedback).
6. Support the provision of information and resources to
students.
2.2.3. Levels of Blended Learning
As pointed out by Graham (2004: 10-12), blended
learning can occur at different levels, such as the student
activity level, course level, program level, and institutional
level. Students at different levels of their university studies
need a teacher to support their learning activities, but in all
levels the teacher should soon draw back and emphasize
student’s self-regulation in learning. Al Fiky (2011: 42-45)
classified it according to its nature, quality and the degree of
blend to four categories:
1. Component level: This depends on the combination
between several information transfer media and the
learning content to form a whole which consists of
several separated components that differ according to
the learners' nature and available traditional or
electronic learning resources.
2. Integrated level: It is integration among different
elements of the electronic learning based upon the
internet. Each component supports other components
and evaluation is one of these integrated components
to measure the learners' ability to perform the
assigned learning tasks.
3. Collaborative level: It is based on blend between the
teacher (as a guide) and the co-operative learning
groups in the traditional classroom or the
collaborative learning groups on the internet.
212 Awad Soliman Keshta et al.: The Effectiveness of a Blended Learning Program on
Developing Palestinian Tenth Graders' English Writing Skills
4. Expansive level: The blend between traditional
classroom learning and offline electronic learning
resources (email, electronic documents and books,
programs)
2.2.4. Elements and Design of Blended Learning
Blended learning designs differ according to the elements
that are blended, the percentage of these elements in the
course credit, and the objectives of the courses.
2.2.5. Models of Blended Learning
There are several models like Khan's Octagonal
Framework, Huang, Al-Jazar …etc. Al-Jazar model
consists of five phases; study and analysis, design,
production, evaluation and usage as clarified in Figure (2).
(Al-Jazar, 2002):
Figure 2. Al-Jazar Model: Designing and Producing Multimedia
Interactive Programs
The researchers adopted Al-Jazar model for the blended
learning program following all the five phases; analyzing
learners', educational needs and resources, program design,
producing the required media and facilities, evaluating the
program and finally implementing the program with
on-going assessment and evaluation.
Reasons for Choosing Al-Jazar Model
1. The model has a lot of educational applications in
the Arab World, which proves its reliability.
2. It follows the scientific approach of thinking.
3. It has logical sequence from analyzing learners'
characteristics as well as needs and tries to find
appropriate solutions that satisfy them.
4. Sub-stages are organized systematically.
5. It covers all the teaching learning events.
6. Its suitability to novice designers.
2.2.6. Factors Influencing the Application of Blended
Learning
A number of factors affect the use of blended learning in
language courses:
1. Teachers' and learners' attitudes; positive, negative or
neutral.
2. Learner's level may influence the technology to be
used and how it is used.
3. The training the teacher has got about employing
technology inside the class.
4. Teachers' and learners' access to technology
incorporating it in the courses.
5. Cost of supported materials. (Sharma and Barrett,
2007: 12-13)
2.2.7. Blended Learning Design Process
The selection, organization and primary presentation of
course content, as well as the design and development of
learning activities and assessment, is a pivotal responsibility
for the instructor (Billigmeier, 2011). Bath and Bourke,
(2010) describe a five phase design for blended learning as a
systematic approach, starting with:
1. Planning for integrating blended learning into your
course, followed by;
2. Designing and developing blended learning elements;
3. Implementing the blended learning design;
4. Reviewing (evaluating) the effectiveness of your
blended learning design, and;
5. Planning for the next delivery of your course then
involves improving the blended learning experience for both
staff and students.
2.2.8. Advantages of Blended Learning
Osguthorpe and Graham (2003) identify six reasons why
one might choose to design or use a blended learning system:
(1) pedagogical richness, (2) access to knowledge, (3) social
interaction, (4) personal agency, (5) cost effectiveness, and
(6) ease of revision. Graham and Robinson (2007) add three
other reasons that encourage people to select the blended
learning approach i.e. improved pedagogy, increased access,
and flexibility.
Al Fiky (2011: 24-26) summarizes the benefits of blended
leaning as follows:
1. Increasing students' interaction and participation.
2. Developing students' learning and performance.
3. Affecting teachers' approaches of other subjects.
4. Developing independent learners, a source of instant
feedback, time saving and motivation to learners
(Sharma and Barrett, 2007: 10-12);
5. Increasing student learning outcomes and reduce
instructional delivery costs. (Dziuban, Hartman and
Moskal, 2004) and;
6. Maximizing classroom space and/or reduce the
number of overcrowded classrooms. Gould (2003:
55);
7. Allowing institutions to offer more classes at peak
demand times of the day, thus maximizing the scant
resources by increasing flexibility in scheduling.
 Education Journal 2013; 2(6): 208-221
8. Reducing paper and photocopying costs. In hybrid
courses, all course documents, including syllabi,
lecture notes, assignment sheets and other hard copy
handouts, are easily accessible to the students on the
course web site.
A lot of studies confirmed those advantages of blended
learning. For example, Oblender's (2002) study revealed that
blended learning increased the percentage of students'
punctuality in the daily attendance to 99% from the students
in general. While a study conducted by Gamble (2005)
proved that blended learning led to expanding and
improving students' learning experiences, and the results of
Milheim's study (2006) revealed some of the advantages of
blended learning like; Immediate feedback for students,
face-to-face interaction with the teacher during learning, and
the flexibility of handling different content subjects
according to the available circumstances.
2.2.9. Challenges Facing Blended Learning
The application of blended learning revealed some of the
difficulties and challenges which might affect the quality of
teaching and learning and hinders the expansion of using it
in a wide range in the teaching. Hofmann (2011) describes a
variety of technical, organizational, and design challenges
facing blended learning:
1. Ensuring participants' ability to use technology
successfully.
2. Overcoming the idea that blended is not as effective as
traditional teaching.
3. Managing and monitoring participant progress.
4. Matching the best delivery medium to the performance
objective.
5. Keeping online offerings interactive rather than just
“talking at” participants.
6. Some adults experience some computer-related phobia
(Saade and Kira, 2009) and;
7. Frustration, confusion, anger, anxiety and similar
emotional states which may be associated with the
interaction can adversely affect productivity, learning, social
relationships and overall well-being.
3. Previous Studies
Al-Masry (2012)
This study investigated the effectiveness of using
electronic blended learning in teaching a unit in English
course at the cognitive levels (recognition ,
comprehension, and application) by second year secondary
female students in Makkah. The quasi-experimental
approach was used. The study population was all (156)
female students in the second secondary school in
Makkah. The study sample was (56) students, divided into
two groups: an experimental group of (31) students, and a
control of (25) students. An achievement test prepared by
the researcher was used to collect data. The results
concluded there were statistically significant differences at
(0.05) level between the average test scores of the group of
213
students who learned by using the electronic blended
learning, and the control group of students who learned by
using the traditional method in post-application of the
achievement test at the " recognition ", "comprehension" and
"application" level in favor of the experimental group.
Sayed (2012)
This study investigated the effect of the electronic
portfolio on developing the English language writing skills
for second grade preparatory school students. The sample
was (60 students) selected from Nader El-Riyadh
Preparatory School. They were divided into two groups:
control (30 students) and experimental (30 students). The
students of the experimental group practiced writing on a
website under the teacher's guidance and feedback. A post
writing test was administered to collect data. The results
showed there was a statistically significant difference
between the mean scores of the experimental group and the
control group at the (0.0 1) level in favor of the experimental
group’s mean score. It was concluded that the electronic
portfolio had a large effect on the writing skills of second
year preparatory school students.
Kocoglu, Ozek and Kesli (2011)
This study examined the effectiveness of a blended
learning approach for a teacher training program designed
for in-service English language teachers, compared with a
face-to-face Program in English Language teaching. The
research involved 39 in-service English language teachers,
with 12 studying in a blended course (i.e., they received
face-to-face instruction in the classroom and used
web-based materials) and 27 in a traditional classroom. The
study followed a quasi-experimental study with a
non-equivalent groups design. To collect data from the study
sample, the researchers used Teaching Knowledge Test
(TKT), final course grades (assignments, exams, projects
and quizzes), and a feedback questionnaire. Results
indicated that there was no difference in content knowledge
acquisition between teachers receiving blended instruction
and teachers receiving face-to-face instruction.
Shih (2011)
This study investigated the effect of integrating
"Facebook" and peer assessment with college English
writing class instruction through a blended teaching
approach. The subjects were 23 first-year students majoring
in English at a technological university in Taiwan
participating in an 18 week English writing class. Both
quantitative and qualitative approaches were employed in
the study. Research instruments included pre-test and
post-test of English writing skills, a self-developed survey
questionnaire, and in-depth student interviews. The findings
suggested that incorporating peer assessment using "Face
book" in learning English writing can be interesting and
effective for college-level English writing classes. Students
can improve their English writing skills and knowledge not
214 Awad Soliman Keshta et al.: The Effectiveness of a Blended Learning Program on
Developing Palestinian Tenth Graders' English Writing Skills
only from the in-class instruction but also from cooperative
learning. In addition, this "Face book" integrated instruction
can significantly enhance students' interest and motivation.
Kaoud (2007)
This study examined the effectiveness of internet blended
discussion group on developing some composition writing
skills of first year secondary school students, namely
language use skill (structure) and the writing mechanics
(punctuation, capitalization, spelling and paragraphing). For
this purpose (60) EFL students enrolled in the old secondary
school for girls in Kafr El-Sheikh city were randomly
selected and randomly assigned to two groups; one control
and the other experimental. The experimental group was
taught using the internet discussion, whereas the control
group adopted the traditional method to the teaching of
composition. A composition writing skills pre-post test was
used to collect data. Results revealed there were statistically
significant differences at (0.05) level between the average
test scores of the group of students who learned by using
the internet blended discussion, and the control group of
students who learned by using the traditional method in
favor of the experimental group.
Al-Jarf (2004)
This study tried to find out whether there were significant
differences in achievement between
English-as-a-foreign-language (EFL) freshman students
exposed to traditional in-class writing instruction depending
on the textbook only, and those exposed to a combination of
traditional in-class instruction and Web-based instruction in
writing. The study sample consisted of 113 EFL freshman
students in first semester of translation program at College
of Language and Translation, King Saud University in Saudi
Arabia. All students were pretested before instruction and
studied the same writing textbook for 12 weeks. In addition,
the experimental group received online instruction in which
they posted their own threads, short paragraphs, stories, or
poems on a discussion board. They located information
related to themes covered in the book from Internet sites
such as “Yahoo! Movies” and “WebMD.” They word
processed their paragraphs and checked their own spelling
using Microsoft Word. At the end of the treatment, both
groups were post tested. Results showed that the
experimental group scored significantly higher than the
control group. Web-based instruction proved to be an
important factor in enhancing the writing quality of
unskilled, low ability EFL students and resulted in a
significant improvement in their post-test scores.
It is obvious that nearly all the studies which were
conducted in various environments have examined the
effectiveness of blended learning in the teaching learning
process inside or outside the classroom. Nearly all the
studies have displayed blended learning as significant
method in sustaining students' achievement, attitudes and
perceptions in various subjects where teachers employed it
as an alternative for completely face-to-face or on-line
learning.
4. Methodology
This study aimed at investigating the effectiveness of
using a blended learning program on developing and
retention of Palestinian tenth graders’ English writing skills.
4.1. Research Design
The researchers adopted the quasi experimental approach.
Two groups were assigned as the participants of the study;
the experimental group, and the control group. The research
includes three variables; the first variable is blended learning
program, the second variable is writing skills, the third
variable is writing skills retention. The experimental group
was taught writing via blended learning, while the control
group was taught via the traditional method. The experiment
lasted for eight weeks. Both groups were taught by the same
teacher.
4.1.1. Population of the Study
The population of the study consists of all tenth graders at
the governmental schools in the Rafah Directorate enrolled
in the second semester of the school year (2012-2013) who
count ( 1774) according to Ministry of Education records.
4.1.2. Sample of the Study
The sample of the study consisted of (40) students
distributed into two groups; one experimental group consists
of (20) students and one control group includes (20) students.
The sample of the study was randomly chosen and
distributed from the tenth grade classes in Shohada' Rafah
Basic School.
Table (1). The distribution of the sample according to the groups
Group Experimental Control Total
No. of sample 20 20 40
Both groups were all in grade ten aged nearly 15. They
were chosen from the same school. They were similar in
their general achievement in accordance with the statistical
treatment of their results in the first term of the school year
(2012-2013). In this year, all classes were similar in their
achievement as they were distributed according to their
achievement in equivalent classes. A pre-test was used to
check the similarity of achievement between the two groups.
4.1.3. The Variables of the Study
The study included the following variables:
1. The independent variable represented in the blended
learning program
2. The dependent variable represented in the tenth
graders’ English writing skills and retention.
 Education Journal 2013; 2(6): 208-221 215

5. Instrumentation Table (2). Correlation coefficient of every item of the test with the total
score
The researchers used the following instruments to achieve
the aims of the study: Pearson Pearson
No. Sig. level No. Sig. level
correlation correlation
1- Achievement writing test (Pre & post)
1 0.560 0.015 21 0.505 0.027
2- The blended program
2 0.691 0.002 22 0.603 0.009
5.1. Writing Test 3 0.477 0.036 23 0.587 0.011
4 0.630 0.006 24 0.456 0.044
The achievement test was prepared by the researchers to
measure the students’ achievement in writing. It was used as 5 0.463 0.041 25 0.642 0.005
a pre test applied before the experiment, as a post test after 6 0.648 0.004 26 0.607 0.008
the experiment. 7 0.530 0.021 27 0.489 0.032
5.1.1. The General Aim of the Test 8 0.671 0.003 28 0.750 0.001
The test aimed at measuring the effect of the blended 9 0.556 0.016 29 0.607 0.008
learning program on the subjects’ writing skills in English 10 0.691 0.002 30 0.677 0.003
mainly (Form, Coherence and Cohesion). It was designed 31
11 0.583 0.011 0.652 0.004
according to the content analysis, the objectives of each
12 0.567 0.014 32 0.564 0.014
level and the percentage weight for each domain according
13 0.725 0.001 33 0.564 0.014
to Bloom's taxonomy and the table of specifications.
14 0.810 0.000 34 0.477 0.036
5.1.2. The Pilot Study 35
15 0.560 0.015 0.477 0.036
To examine the appropriateness of the test items, the test
16 0.583 0.011 36 0.648 0.004
reliability, the required time for application, as well as
17 0.583 0.011 37 0.657 0.004
difficulty and discrimination coefficients, the test was
administered to a random pilot sample of (15) students from 18 0.599 0.009 38 0.730 0.001
Shohada' Rafah Basic School. Test time, while applying it 19 0.466 0.040 39 0.576 0.012
on the pilot study, was computed according to the following 20 0.603 0.009 40 0.477 0.036
equation:
According to table (2), the coefficient correlation of each
item is significant at (0.01) and (0.05). It can be concluded
that the test is highly consistent and valid to be used as a tool
The time of test was (60) minutes. The clarity of the of the study.
questions was checked. The misleading items were also 5.1.3.3. Reliability of the Test
modified. The researchers found that students are suffering The test is regarded reliable when it gives the same results
from low achievement in English writing skills. in case of re-applying it for the same purpose in the same
5.1.3. The Validity of the Test conditions (Al-Agha, 1996:120). After applying the test on
Al Agha (1996: 118) states that a valid test is the test that the pilot study, the researcher used Kuder-Richardson
measures what it is designed to measure. The study used the (K_R20) and Spearman Brown (Spilt-half) methods to
referee validity and the internal consistency validity . measure the test reliability as it is presented in Table (3).
(K_R20) depends on calculating the percentage of correct
5.1.3.1. The Referee Validity answers of the test items, and also on the variance of every
The test was introduced to a jury of specialists in the item.
English language and methodology in Gaza universities,
Ministry of Education and supervisors and experienced Table (3). (K_R20) coefficient and Split-half of the test
teachers in the governmental schools. The items of the test (K_R20) coefficient Split -half
were modified according to their recommendations. No. of Correlation Spearman
Domain (K_R20)
items between forms Brown
5.1.3.2. The Internal Consistency Validity Total 40 0.956 0.925 0.961
Al Agha (1996: 121) asserts that the internal consistency
validity indicates the correlation of the score of each item According to Table (3), the test proved to be highly
with the total average of the test. It also indicates the reliable and could be used confidently in the basic
correlation of the average of each skill with the total average. experiment. (K_20) coefficient was (0.956) and the Spilt-
This validity was calculated by using Pearson Formula. half coefficient was (0.961) and they are good coefficients
which could be depended on in applying the achievement
test.
216 Awad Soliman Keshta et al.: The Effectiveness of a Blended Learning Program on
Developing Palestinian Tenth Graders' English Writing Skills

5.1.4. Scoring of the Test The discrimination coefficient of the test items varied
The test was scored by a simple traditional way. Each between (0.40-1.00) with a total mean (0.67). And since the
correct answer was awarded one point. The maximum accepted achievement test items should have discrimination
average was (40) and the minimum was (zero). So, the total coefficients larger than (0.25), all the items were accepted.
points for the whole test were 40. The discrimination coefficient of the test varied between
(0.40-1.00) with a total mean (0.67). And since the accepted
5.1.5. Difficulty Coefficient achievement test items should have discrimination
Difficulty coefficient is measured by finding out the coefficients larger than (0.25), all the items were accepted.
percentage of the wrong answers of each item made by the
students ( Abu Nahia ,1994 :308). Having applied the 5.2. The Blended Program
formula, the difficulty coefficient of the test items varied
between (0.466 - 0.730) with a total mean (0.58). Since the After reviewing the literature of education technology and
accepted items of the achievement test vary between scientific studies of developing and designing educational
(0.35-0.65), all the items are accepted and the test is suitable program models according to design criteria, the researcher
to be used as a tool of the study. decided to follow Al Jazar model to design the proposed
educational program which aims at developing tenth
5.1.6. Discrimination Coefficient graders' writing skills to the extent their competencies allow.
The discrimination coefficient was calculated according
to the following formula: 5.2.1. Content of the Program
The content of this suggested program was carefully
Table (4). Difficulty and Discrimination of Items of the Test selected to help improve the students writing skills through
the blended learning program. The suggested program
No. Difficulty coefficient Discrimination coefficient
1 0.60 0.60
consisted of five units, based on the content of grade ten
2 0.533 0.60 textbook. The program covered ten lessons. Each lesson was
3 0.60 0.40 forty-five minutes.
4 0.60 0.80
5 0.466 0.60 5.2.2. The Validity of the Program
6 0.466 0.80 To test the program validity, the researcher submitted its
7 0.533 0.40 first version to a group of supervisors and teachers of
8 0.466 0.80
9 0.466 0.60
education technology. The researcher did the required
10 0.533 0.80 adjustment according to their recommendations. Then the
11 0.60 0.80 researcher prepared a list of criteria with (10) domains
12 0.466 0.80 including (70) indicators which were given to a panel of
13 0.666 0.80 specialists in education technology from the Islamic
14 0.466 1.00
15 0.60 0.60
University, Al-Aqsa University, Al-Quds Open University,
16 0.60 0.60 and Ministry of Education. The criteria were modified
17 0.60 0.80 according to their recommendations into (9) domains with
18 0.533 0.80 (69) indicators. Then the program package including (the
19 0.60 0.60 software program – student's textbook – teacher's guide –
20 0.666 0.60
21 0.666 0.60
electronic test) was presented to the panel again to evaluate
22 0.666 0.60 it according to the criteria list.
23 0.73 0.60 The researcher modified the program according to their
24 0.666 0.40 suggestions and produced the final copy to be implemented
25 0.60 0.80 to achieve the planned objectives.
26 0.60 0.60
27 0.60 0.40 5.2.3. Pilot Experimenting of the Program
28 0.666 0.80
29 0.60 0.80
To be sure of the program's suitability, it was
30 0.60 0.60 experimented on a pilot study of the tenth grade in the same
31 0.666 0.80 school other than the study sample so that the teacher who
32 0.533 0.60 would apply it acquire the application experience,
33 0.533 0.80 identifying difficulties of implementation, determining the
34 0.60 0.60
35 0.60 0.40
time schedule for the basic experiment application and
36 0.466 0.80 modifying what is necessary in the initial draft before
37 0.533 0.80 implementing it on the basic study sample.
38 0.73 0.80
39 0.533 0.60 5.2.4. Implementing the Program
40 0.60 0.60 After examining the program's validity, and adjusting it
TOTAL 0.582 0.67 for implementation, permission was issued from the
Ministry of Education to implement the experiment on the
 Education Journal 2013; 2(6): 208-221 217

study sample. The experiment lasted for ten weeks with one Table (7). The Effect Size of the program on the Experimental and the
lesson a week. Control Groups Achievement in the Post-Test

Test df T ²η Effect size

6. Results: Data Analysis
Post test
38 3.818 0.277 Large
The study aimed at investigating the effectiveness of a (total )
blended learning program on developing Palestinian tenth
graders' English writing skills. The researchers used Table (7) shows that the effect size of the program is large
different statistical forms using the statistical program on students' achievement in writing skills. This means that
(SPSS) to analysis the collected data results. Tables were the effect is significant. This large effect may be due to the
also used to clarify and present these data with analysis and activities and techniques which are used in the blended
interpretation. program to develop students' writing skills.
Question One: Question Two:
Are there differences in the achievement level in writing Are there differences in the achievement level in writing
skills in the post test between the students of the skills between the students of the experimental group
experimental group (blended learning) and their (blended learning) in the pre-post test?
counterparts of the control group? To answer this question, the researchers tested the
To answer this question, the researchers tested the following null hypothesis:
following null hypothesis: There are statistically no significant differences at (α
There are statistically no significant differences at (α ≤0.05) in the achievement level in writing skills between the
≤0.05) in the achievement level in writing skills in the post students of the experimental group (blended learning) and in
test between the students of the experimental group (blended the pre-post test.
learning) and their counterparts of the control group.
Table (8). T. Test Paired Sample Results of the Differences in the Total
To examine this hypothesis, means and standard deviation
Average Score between the Pre-Test and the Post Test of the Experimental
of both groups' results on the post-test were computed.
Group
Independent Samples T-test was used to measure the
significant differences. Table (5) describes this: Std. Sig. (2 Sig.
sample N Mean T.
Deviation tailed) level
Table (5). T Test Independent Sample Results of Differences between the
Experimental and the Control Group in the Post Test Post 20 29.90 4.399 11.3 Sig. at
.000
Std. Sig. (2 Sig. 57 0.01
sample N Mean T. Pre 20 13.35 5.869
Deviation tailed) level
Experim "t" table value at ( 19) df. At (0.05) Sig. level equal 1.729
20 29.90 4.399 3.81 Sig. at
ental .000 "t" table value at ( 19) df. At (0.01) Sig. level equal 2.539
8 0.01
Control 20 23.60 5.924

"t" table value at ( 38) df. At (0.05) Sig. level equal 1.686
"t" table value at ( 38) df. At (0.01) Sig. level equal 2.429
As shown in table (20) shows that the T. computed value
is larger than T. table in the test which means that there are
significant differences at (á ≤ 0.01) in the total average score
of the post-test between the experimental and control group
in favor of the experimental group. The mean of the post-test
in the experimental group reached (29.9), whereas the mean
of the control group was (23.60). This result indicates that
using the blended program is more effective than the
traditional method in developing students' writing skills.
To measure the effect size of the blended the researchers
computed "²η" using the following formula :( Affana, 2000:
42)
t2
η2 = total
t2 + df
As shown in table (8) shows that the T. computed value is
larger than T. table in the test which means that there are
significant differences at (á ≤ 0.01) in the total average score
of the experimental group in favor of the post application.
The mean of the post-test group reached (29.90), whereas
the mean of pre-test was (13.35). This means that there are
statistically significant differences between the pre and post
application of the experimental group in favor of the post
application. This means that using the blended program is
very effective in the achievement of tenth graders' writing.
Table(9). The Effect Size of blended program in the Pre- and the Post
Test of the Experimental Group
Test df T ²η Effect size
19 11.357 0.871 Large

Table (6). The Table References to Determine the Level of Size Effect (²η) Table (9) shows that the effect size of program is large on
students' achievement in writing. This means that the effect
Effect size criterion
Test is significant.
Small Medium Large
²η 0.01 0.6 0.14
218 Awad Soliman Keshta et al.: The Effectiveness of a Blended Learning Program on
Developing Palestinian Tenth Graders' English Writing Skills
7. Discussion
The study aimed at investigating the effectiveness of a
blended learning program on developing Palestinian tenth
graders' English writing skills.
To achieve this aim, the researchers adopted the
experimental approach where there were two similar groups:
the experimental and the control groups. The population of
the study was all the tenth graders in Rafah Directorate of
Education. The sample of the study, namely (40) students
were selected randomly from Shohada' Rafah Basic School.
Each group has twenty students. Both were proved to be
similar in terms of age, general achievement, general
achievement in English and English writing skills
achievement. The researcher used three instrument and tools
to collect data: content analysis, a pre-post test, and the
blended learning program. The experiment started at the
second semester of the school year (2012-2013) and lasted
for eight weeks. The researchers used a variety of blended
techniques and activities. The population of the study
consisted of all tenth graders at the governmental schools in
Rafah Directorate.
8. Findings
1. In the light of the statistical results, the researchers
concluded the following findings:
2. There are differences of statistical significance in the
tenth graders' achievement level of English writing
skills due to the teaching learning method i.e. the
blended learning program.
3. There are differences of statistical significance in the
tenth graders' achievement level of English writing
skills for the experimental group in favor of the post
application.
This May be Attributed to
1. Employing more than one sense as well as addressing
the students' different learning styles through variety of
the activities, techniques and multi-media which
included pictures, texts, videos, and PowerPoint slides.
2. The blended program created on-going interactive and
a non-threatening learning environment that
encouraged interactions between students and teachers,
enhanced communication, cooperation and teamwork
and encouraged active participation which increased
their motivation and interest in learning.
3. The program also offered continuous feedback which
reflected in students' progress in learning if the answers
were right or modifying them if they were wrong.
4. The program helped students develop self-learning
strategies in an interesting way, recognize the relations
between the content components, re-organize the
information presented in various forms, and give
deductions from the available information such as
searching for additional information about the writing
skill from the searching drives on the internet.
5. The program also enabled students to express
themselves freely via writing and to participate
according to their competencies and learning styles.
6. Discussing issues on e-mail and Facebook walls was
effective in developing students' writing skills.
7. This program developed students' communication
skills, their interaction with the educational materials
presented, co-operation among students,
self-evaluation tools, informational search and training
opportunities which are not found in the traditional
method.
9. Conclusion
Based on the findings, derived from the results of this
study, the following conclusions were reached:
1. Blended learning provided students with a better
learning environment through variety of multi-media
resources which enhanced self-learning strategies and
reflected on their achievement of English language.
2. Blended learning stimulated students towards
independent practice of English language instead of direct
instruction.
3. Blended learning was very effective in motivating shy
students and low achievers towards participation and
interaction both in synchronous and asynchronous activities
because they were not criticized.
4. The blend provided students with enjoyment, pleasure,
enthusiasm and variation which were significant enough to
affect the students' achievement positively.
5. Self-evaluation tasks with immediate feedback gave
students a chance for confidence and self-evaluation to
support self- learning strategies.
6. Availability of on-line and off-line resources enabled
students to revisit the language at the ease and comfort of
time.
10. Pedagogical Implications
In the light of the study results, the researchers suggest the
following:
1. Teachers should be aware of their students' needs and
abilities and choose the suitable blend for them.
2. Teachers should train their students on self-learning
strategies to enhance blended learning potentials.
3. Teachers should not be hunting for mistakes. In fact,
mistakes are source of learning.
4. Teachers should avoid teacher-centered class and move
towards student-centered classes.
5. Classroom motivating environment could be created
through utilizing all the available resources inside and
outside the walls.
6. Students like to write and talk about things related to
their real life and experiences. So teachers should
always create reasons for learning.
7. Training teachers on strategies, types and
implementation of blended learning is a pre-requisite
 Education Journal 2013; 2(6): 208-221
for establishing blend strategy inside schools.
11. Recommendations
In the light of the results, the researchers recommend:
Curriculum designers and decision makers should enrich
the Palestinian curriculum with different educational
activities that enhance blended learning and practicing
English language and supply schools with the necessary
equipment for employing blended learning such as enough
computer labs, interactive smart boards, multi-media
resources and Internet access.
Supervisors are recommended to provide teachers with
instructional materials which increase their awareness of
blended learning as a new method that suits modern trends in
teaching and learning and conduct workshops to enhance
teachers' competencies of implementing blended learning.
English language teachers are recommended to change
the methods and approaches of teaching from traditional to
the blend which is based on the students' real involvement,
help students use English language in "life-like" situations
such as emails, chatting, forums, text messaging and blogs
and change their role from instructors who dominate the
class into educators whose role is to facilitate, guide,
coordinate and support students to communicate.
12. Recommendations for Further
Studies
The researchers suggested the following
recommendations for further studies:
1. Comparing and contrasting teachers' perspectives
regarding blended learning.
2. Investigating the impact of blended learning on
developing students' reading for comprehension in
English language.
3. Parents' role in motivating their children in utilizing
technology in self-learning.
4. The effectiveness of blended learning on in-service
teachers training and their attitudes towards it should be
researched.
5. Investigating English language majors' attitude towards
utilizing the Moodle in teaching inside the Islamic
University.
6. The efficiency of governmental schools in
implementing blended learning program.
References
[1] Abo- Mosa, M. A. and Al-Soos S. A. (2010). The impact of a
training program based on blended learning on teachers'
competence in designing and producing educational
multi-media. Research presented to the first international
conference of Omani Association for Educational
Technologies. Massqat: Oman.
[2] Abu Nahia, S. (1994). Educational Measurement. 1st ed.,
219
Cairo: Anglo Egyptian Library.
[3] Al Agha, I. (1997). Educational Research, Elements,
Methodology and Tools. The Internal Consistency Validity
(4th ed.). Gaza, Palestine: Islamic University.
[4] Affana, a. (2000). The effect size in educational research.
Palestinian Educational Studies Journal 3(6).
[5] Al Fiky, A. I. (2011). Blended Learning: Educational Design,
Multi-media, Creative Thinking. Amman (Jordan): Dar
Athaqafa for publishing and distribution.
[6] Al-Haq A., F. & Al-Sobh A., M. (2010). The effect of a
web-based writing instructional EFL program on enhancing
the performance of Jordanian secondary students. The JALT
CALL Journal 6(3) : 189–218.
[7] Al-Jarf, R. (2004). The Effect of Web-based Learning on
Struggling EFL College Writers. Foreign Language Annals
37(1): 49-57. Retrieved February 6th, 2013
from:http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/detailm
ini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=EJ
683959&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=EJ683
959
[8] Al-Jazar, A. A. (2002). The Effectiveness of Using
Multi-media Computer Aided Teaching in Acquiring Some
Scientific Concepts Levels According to "Febrayer" Model
to evaluate these concepts. Education Journal, Al-Azhar
University (125).
[9] Al-Masry, N. M. S. (2012). The Effectiveness of Using
Blended Learning in Teaching A unit in English language in
Second Secondary Class in Mecca. Unpublished Master
Degree, Faculty of Education, Mecca, Om El-Qura
University.
[10] Angelillo, J. (2002)." A Fresh Approach to Teaching
Punctuation: Helping Young Writers Use Conventions With
Precision", New York: Scholastic, Inc.
[11] Bates, A.W. (2000). Managing Technological Change:
Strategies for College and University Leaders. San Francisco:
Jossey Bass.
[12] Bath, D. & Bourke, J. (2010).Getting started with blended
learning. Australia: Griffith Institute for Higher Education.
[13] Bersin &Associates (2003). Blended Learning: what works?
Retrieved March 21st from
http://www.bersin.com/Search/Index.aspx?search=blended
%20learning&idx=research
[14] Billigmeier, G.M. (2011). Blended Learning: Design and
Implementation. Retrieved March 26th, 2013 from
http://imet.csus.edu/imet10/portfolio/billigmeier_g/billigmei
er/ROLFinal.pdf
[15] Bonk, C. J., Graham, C. R. (2006). The handbook of blended
learning: Global perspectives, local designs. San Francisco:
Pfieffer.
[16] Carroll. R. T. 1990. "Students Success Guide: Writing
Skills." Retrieved March 30th, 2013 from
www.skepdic.com/refuge/writing skills.pdf.
[17] Chastain, K. (1988). Developing Second Language Skills:
Theory and Practice. San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
[18] DeLacey, B.J., & D.A. Leonard (2002). Case study on
technology and distance in education at the Harvard Business
220 Awad Soliman Keshta et al.: The Effectiveness of a Blended Learning Program on
Developing Palestinian Tenth Graders' English Writing Skills
School. Educational Technology and Society, 5( 2): 13–28
[19] Dixon (1986). Teaching Composition to Large Classes.
English Teaching Forum, 25(3): 22-43.
[20] Driscoll, M. (2002). Blended learning: Let’s get beyond the
hype. Learning and training innovations news line. Retrieved
March 22nd, 2013 from
http://www.ltimagazine.com/ltimagazine/article/articleDetail
.jsp?id=11755.
[21] Dziuban, C. D., Hartman, J. L. & Moskal, P. D. (2004).
Blended Learning. Retrieved March 2nd, 2013 from Educause
http://www.educause.edu/library/resources/blended-learning
. Learning. London: Kogan Page.
[22] Finn, A. & Bucceri, M. (2004). A case study approach to
blended learning. Los Angeles: Centra Software. Retrieved
March 3rd, 2013 from
http://www.conferzone.com/resource/wp/CaseStudy_Blende
dLearning.pdf.
[23] Gamble, Valerie J. (2005). The effectiveness of blended
learning for the employee. Dissertation Unpublished.
Fielding Graduate University.
[24] Garrison, R., & Vaughan, H. (2008). Blended learning in
higher education: Framework, principles and guidelines. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
[25] Gebhardt, R. C. & Rodrigues, D. (1989). Writing processes
and Intentions. America: D. C. Health and company.
[26] Gould, T. (2003). Hybrid classes: Maximizing institutional
resources and student learning. Proceedings of the 2003
ASCUE Conference, Myrtle Beach, South Carolina.
Retrieved March 8th, 2013
fromhttp://www.ascue.org/files/proceedings/2003/p54.pdf.
[27] Graham, C. R., & Robinson, R. (2007). Realizing the
transformational potential of blended learning. In Blended
Learning Research Perspectives (83-110). Needham, MA:
The Sloan Consortium.
[28] Graham, C.R. (2004). Blended learning systems: Definition,
current trends, and future directions. In The handbook of
blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs, ed.
C.J.Bonk and C.R. Graham, 3–21. San Francisco: Pfeiffer.
Retrieved March 23rd, 2013 from
http://www.academia.edu/563281/Blended_learning_system
s_Definition_current_trends_and_future_directions
[29] Halliday, M., & Hasan, R. (1985). Language, context, and
text: Aspects of language in a social semiotic perspective.
Deakin: Deakin University.
[30] Haring L. W. (1994).Personalizing Education, New York,
Hudelson, S.: Write on children writing in ESL, center for
applied linguistics, USA, New Jersey, Prentice Hall Regents.
[31] Harmer, J. (2001). "How to Teach English." An Introduction
to the Practice of English Language Teaching. Essex,
England: Pearson Education Limited.
[32] Hofmann J. (2011). Top 10 Challenges of Blended Learning.
Retrieved March 23rd, 2013 from
http://www.trainingmag.com/article/soapbox-top-10-challen
ges-blended-learning
[33] Hooper, S. (1992). Cooperation learning and computer-based
instruction. Educational Technology Research and
Development, 40(3): 21–38.Retrieved April 6th, 2013 from
http://link.springer.com/journal/11423
[34] Huang, R. H., Zhou, Y. L., & Wang, Y. (2006). Blended
Learning: Theory into Practice. Beijing: Higher Education
Press.
[35] Johnstone, K.M. et. al (2002). Effects of Repeated Practice
and Contextual-Writing Experiences on College Pupils'
Writing Skills. Journal of educational psychology, 94(2):
305-313.
[36] Jolliffe, A., Ritter, J., & Stevens, D. (2001). The Online
Learning Handbook Developing and Using Web-Based
[37] Joy-Matthews, J., Megginson, D., & Surtees, M. (2004).
Human resource development (3rd ed.). London: Kogan
Page.
[38] Kaoud, A. A. E. (2007). The Effectiveness of Internet
Blended Discussion Group on Developing Some
Composition Writing Skills of First Year Secondary School
Students. Retrieved April 3rd, 2013 from
http://srv3.eulc.edu.eg/eulc_v5/libraries/start.aspx.
[39] Kendall, M. (2001). Teaching online to campus-based
students: The experience of using WebCT for the community
information module at Manchester Metropolitan University.
Education for Information, 19(4): 325–346.
[40] Kerres, M., & De Witt, C. (2003). A didactical framework for
the design of blended learning arrangements. Journal of
Educational Media, 28(2/3): 101–113.
[41] King, G. (2003)." Good Writing Guide". Updated ed.,
Glasgow: Harper Collins Publishers.
[42] Kocoglu, Z., Ozek, Y. and Kesli, Y. (2011). Blended learning:
Investigating its potential in an English language teacher
training program. Australasian Journal of Educational
Technology, 27(7): 1124-1134.
[43] Lindsay, C. & Knight, P. (2006). Learning and Teaching
English. A Course for Teachers, Oxford University Press
[44] Min, W. & Li, J. Z. (2007). Implicit Part of Process Writing in
Academic English Writing. US-China Foreign Language
5(8).
[45] NACOL. (2008). Fast facts about online learning (Issue
report,1-6). Vienna: North American Council for Online
Learning. Retrieved March 5th, 2013, from http://
www.NACOL.org
[46] Norman, R.; Singer, D.; McPherson, C. and Bradburn, K.
(2005). Project-oriented Technical Writing, 5th Edition.
Huntsville: University of Alabama.
[47] Oblender, Th. (2002). A hybrid Course Model: One Solution
to the High Online dropout Rate. Learning with Technology,
29(6): 42-46.
[48] Olshtain, E. (2001). Functional tasks for mastering the
mechanics of writing and going just beyond. In M.
Celce-Murcia (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign
language (3rd ed., 207-217). United Sates: Heinle & Heinle.
[49] Osguthorpe, R. T. and Graham, C. R., (2003). Blended
learning environments: Definitions and directions. The
Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 4( 3): 227-233.
 Education Journal 2013; 2(6): 208-221 221

[50] Palmer, D. (1986). Writing Skills, at the chalk face; Practical [58] Sayed, E.. A. A. (2012). The Effect of Using Electronic
Techniques in Language Teaching. London: Edward Arnold Portfolios on Developing the English Language Writing
Publishers Ltd. Skills for Second Grade Preparatory School Students.
Retrieved April 3rd, 2013 from
[51] Richards, J. (1990). The language teaching matrix. England: http://srv3.eulc.edu.eg/eulc_v5/libraries/start.aspx.
Cambridge University press.
[59] Sharma, Pete & Barrett, Barney (2007). Blended Learning:
[52] Richards, J. C.( 2003). Second Language Writing. Ken Using technology in and beyond the language classroom.
Hyland: Cambridge Language Education. London: Macmillan Publishers Limited.
[53] Richards, J.C., & Renandya, W.A. (Eds.). [60] Shih, R. (2011). Can Web 2.0 technology assist college
(2005).Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of students in learning English writing? Integrating Face book
current practice (5th ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University and peer assessment with blended learning. Australasian
Press. Journal of Educational Technology, 27(5): 829-845.
[54] Rossett, A., Douglis, F., & Frazee, R. V. (2003). Strategies for [61] Sokolik, M. (2003). Writing. Practical English Language
building blended learning. Learning Circuits. Retrieved April Teaching. Edited by D Nunan. New York: McGraw-Hill,
27th, 2013 from 87-108.
http://www.learningcircuits.org/2003/jul2003/rossett.htm.
[62] Sun, T. (2003) Read Me First! A Style Guide for the
[55] Rovai, A., & Jordan, H. (2004). Blended learning and sense Computer Industry, Chapter One. Second Edition., New
of community: A comparative analysis with traditional and Jersey: Prentice Hall.
fully online graduate courses. The International Review of
Research in Open and Distance Learning, 5 (2). Retrieved [63] Tang, X. (2006). Principles in Teaching Process. Writing in a
April 3rd, 2013 from: Learner-Centered Classroo, 3 (2), (Serial No.26) East China
http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/192/274. Jiao Tong University.

[56] Saade, R.G. and Kira, D. (2009). Computer anxiety [64] Wenger, E. (1999). Communities of Practice: Learning,
ine-learning: The effect of computer self-efficacy. Journal of Meaning and Identity. New York: Cambridge University
Information Technology Education (8): 177-190. Press.
[57] Saunders, G., & Klemming, F. (2003). Integrating technology
into a traditional learning environment. Active Learning in
Higher Education, 4(1): 74–86.